No need to enforce the regs if they increase the cost of the stamp to such and extent that those who rely on fishing to reduce food costs can't afford it. There are plenty of warm water species and waters that they can fish for to stock their table. No need to do it with trout. Besides, after the first few miles below the dam the warm water species show up. Let them fish further down the river. There is plenty of access to warm water fish, especially relative to trout.

I talked to a guide today t the fly shop here in Johnson City. He was in favor of the fee. His reasoning. A lot of out of state guides are coming to Tennessee and not spending a dime beyond their license. No food, no gas, nothing, no need too the just bring it all with them. He also believed that this will in no way thin the guide population, or at least not enough to matter. Most guides who have any stake in their business will pay the fee, only a select few would not. It's a revenue that was otherwise not collected and wheether it fills the entire void left by federal funding withdraw or not, it's still more than nothing. He mentioned that a $200 resident $1000 non resident option was on the table, and I would be all for that, to help promotion our local guides.

We all like to blame the bait fisher, or "stringer full" guy, but the truth is we all use the resource whether we actively keep fish or not. Fish die, sometimes naturally, sometimes with a size 18 fly in their throat. If we want them their to catch, I think we need to be willing to pay to support them. I agree that trout stamps should be higher as well, it's currently $10 cheaper than any other add on stamp. $10 per angler would go a long way to support the fisheries.

These fees also would not go into the general fund, they would be specifically allocated to Trout Fishing, so if we add all other warm water guides and hunting guides, that's just mre hands in the cookie jar.

I also agree that we should stop stocking ares with trout that cannot support them year round. I undertake they don't reproduce at great rates in certain areas, but some streams they all die in the summer. That just seems ridiculous to me

I voted 'For' in the poll. I think it could be a good thing. It could differentiate leisure fisherman from commercial fisherman. This will assist the resource agencies with data gathering and relevant information for making future resource allocations. The fee seems to be nominal for a professional guide that is typically-adequately outfitted with top of the line gear. Not that the guide should be punished with extra fees; but, to help give them a legitimate (segment) voice in the system.

Having a guide license would give guides a demographic segment in the resource agencies-user pool. This would allow them to collect data, report data for backing resource allocations, and to help implement control policies.

The only negative I see is in paying the extra fee. However; I think there could be endless possibilities in creating a new segment for the wildlife resources to justify expansion, new programs, funds, protection of funds, etc. Just my opinion; but I think most people are still under the impression that these agencies are out to get them. Many still do not register boats or fail to update their license demographic information. Doing these things help the resource agencies to collect accurate data and to justify resources appropriately. Additionally; much of this data is utilized in analyzing fishing pressure and fishery studies.

I am not trying to argue for this fee. I am just trying to illustrate constructive thought with reasoning.

I do think it would helpful for me to read the negative aspects from current guides and past guides.

Madison you bring you bring up some decent points of discussion and reasoning.

However, I disagree with you mainly because being a guide with good gear doesn't mean that you are rolling in cash. Guides get gear super cheap from mfgs, and sometimes even get it for free. Trust me, from years of being a guide you are far from living the high life.

The reason I retired, and went into my current line of work is because I couldn't afford to hardly survive as a guide. There is 6 months out of the year when you **** near starve.

I loved guiding, but surviving for me was difficult on a guides income.

There is so much cutting into the guide fee: Lunches for 3 people, Gas, Boat purchase/upkeep, Flies/Fly Tying Materials, Insurance, Tippet, Leaders, Drinks, Ice, etc etc. That when your overhead is removed from $375.00 there is about $125-$150 a day left. Add that up over a week which during peak season is about 5 trips on avg, then subtract out the 6 months when there is virtually no work, and you have a pretty meager chunk left.

Adding a guide fee to this makes it that much harder for our guides to stay in business.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve Wright

Yes ....... ( a select few grandfathered in )

Typical big govt liberal response, pick the winners and losers by taxing a few to achieve some agenda.

I just read a couple more of the "yes" responses, and the common theme is that none of the yes votes have ever guided, and seemingly don't know a lot about the industry or the challenges of making it work.

I also wonder how many folks know guides or have ever been guided, because it seems as if there is this tainted few of a guides life, or how a guide uses the resource.

It is really stunning to se the all out war being waged on businesses in this country now, it is coming from all angles....feds, states, and even citizens.

It seems that anyone who runs their own business, and tries to make a buck is demonized, and taxed to oblivion.

I do not understand the dramatic shift in views of Americans, but this used to be a country where we believed in smaller government, less regulation, free markets, and more freedoms.

Honestly, this whole topic makes my skin crawl, and that it has trickled down to fishing is really freaking scary.

My questions is, once you open this door to rampant taxation, what comes next? Think about it....

The way it has been proposed, nope, I can't go along with it. One thing I've seen a couple of times that is being underestimated is the amount of money out of state guides and anglers are spending in TN. I know every time I fish one of the tail waters, I fill up the truck (gas is much cheaper in TN then NC), buy ice, drinks, snacks, and often times a meal at one of the local restaurants. We end up using a local about half the time to run the shuttle, and often camp or stay in a motel, and almost always stop in one of the local fly shops. Plus on my way out of town I throw all the beer and soda cans out of the window for the locals to pick up and recycle.

Madison you bring you bring up some decent points of discussion and reasoning.

However, I disagree with you mainly because being a guide with good gear doesn't mean that you are rolling in cash. Guides get gear super cheap from mfgs, and sometimes even get it for free. Trust me, from years of being a guide you are far from living the high life.

The reason I retired, and went into my current line of work is because I couldn't afford to hardly survive as a guide. There is 6 months out of the year when you **** near starve.

I loved guiding, but surviving for me was difficult on a guides income.

There is so much cutting into the guide fee: Lunches for 3 people, Gas, Boat purchase/upkeep, Flies/Fly Tying Materials, Insurance, Tippet, Leaders, Drinks, Ice, etc etc. That when your overhead is removed from $375.00 there is about $125-$150 a day left. Add that up over a week which during peak season is about 5 trips on avg, then subtract out the 6 months when there is virtually no work, and you have a pretty meager chunk left.

Adding a guide fee to this makes it that much harder for our guides to stay in business.

Typical big govt liberal response, pick the winners and losers by taxing a few to achieve some agenda.

**** are there no conservatives left in this country?

I can appreciate your perspective and point of view. Your post helps illustrate and convey the guide's perspective. Thanks for adding the information to this conducive discussion.

Quote:

Originally Posted by waterwolf

...........
My questions is, once you open this door to rampant taxation, what comes next? Think about it....

I do not enjoy rampant taxation as well. I am still trying to figure out the true intent of this proposed topic and whether it could lead to more control and political vices. I do think it is in outdoorsman's best interests to cognitively critique issues such as these before locking in a stance on either side.-myself included...

The money I pay for a license and trout stamp are subsidizing the income of guides. That is a fact, I don't mind some of it because I think the presence of guides on the river indicate that the sport is active and I use guides from time to time. I think a reasonable amount say $1000 per year is acceptable. General contractors pay fees, many other self employed professions do the same. Professional guides should do the same.

I have used guides, here and out west. I understand the value they add to to experience of fly fishing. I understand it is a difficult profession, so are many other professions. You chose it, now do something to ensure your profession. Form a professional organization and be a voice for the river.

As I have said I am in favor of raising the cost of a trout stamp. Not sure at what amount it discourages sportsman that it is detrimental to the sport but just under that amount.

Besides, I am not really sure what nexus there is to require a guide to buy a "fishing" license when most don't actually fish. I don't think TWRA has the legal authority to be able to issue "business" licenses.